Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 68

Thread: I've been thinking about the flutz

  1. #31
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,965
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    I'm okay with a skater leaving a triple out of their arsenal, if it's difficult for them to execute or if they're uncomfortable attempting it. I don't think female skaters should be forced to attempt all 5 jumps. It would be like forcing the men to try both 4T and 4S.
    Difficult to execute? Uncomfortable attempting? IT'S A COMPETITION.

    While I agree too much difficulty just for the sake of difficulty is bad for the sport (REALLY bad in the case of ugly and/or time-consuming CoP spins/footwork), a complete set of Triple jumps should be more valued than it currently is. I don't find your comparison about Quads to be accurate at all. Asking Ladies to have all of their Triples up through Lutz is like asking Men to have all of their Triples up through Axel...which they ALL do, if they ever want to compete at a high level.

  2. #32
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,589
    The isu won't change because flutzing can start out really being a lutz! Intent can be really there for lutz. Sotnikova for one always and never ever does not Flutz but she would like to do a lutz and her flip is so horrendous and awful and she can not do a flip properly but Flutz is no problem so she is not doing a flip her lutz is a Flutz because she can't hold that edge but she is not doing a flip! So they need flutzing and it's not a flip it's a lutz with a mistake.

  3. #33
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,747
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    Asking Ladies to have all of their Triples up through Lutz is like asking Men to have all of their Triples up through Axel...which they ALL do, if they ever want to compete at a high level.
    But the rules for senior competition apply to all entrants in all senior competitions -- those who are already competing "at a high level," those who aspire to get there but haven't achieved that level yet, and those who will never get to elite level but who can qualify as senior level and -- because of age limits -- may not qualify as junior.

    If you want to REQUIRE (not just reward, but penalize and shame anyone who can't achieve) all different triple jumps at the elite level, then you need different rules for elite competition than for other "senior" competitions.

    Already in the last couple years there are minimum technical scores for ISU championships, but not for other senior internationals, so there is precedent of different rules for different senior events.

    So, for those who are in favor of such a requirement --

    How would you word the rule? What exactly would be the requirement, how would it be determined whether the skater complied, and what would be the penalty for failing to do so?

    Which competitions would it apply to and which would be exempt?

    What happens if an excellent skater is having trouble with one or two jump takeoffs, perhaps because of temporary injury, intentionally omits those takeoffs from her program or ends up popping or doubling those jumps in competition, and takes the penalty, but everything else is so good that she earns the highest total score anyway?

  4. #34
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,908
    Here is what is cool about a Lutz jump. Thanks to that outside edge, you are curving THIS way on the ice, then suddenly you pop into the air and you are spinning THAT way. If you "release the counter-rotation prematurely" by rocking over to the wrong edge (thank you gkelly), then … meh. There's no Lutz in your Lutz.

    True, it is easy to tell from the set-up and entrance what jump was intended. But in sports you do not score points for intentions, only for execution. As for the argument that we want skaters to keep on working on their Lutz to develop good technique (rather than to bail with a double Axel), you do not teach good technique by rewarding bad technique.

    I don't see why a 1.5 reduction in base value for a wrong edge take-off would be excessive. That still gives you more points than a triple Salchow or toe loop. And double that penalty for a flutz that doesn't even try.

  5. #35
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    4,811
    "I don't see why a 1.5 reduction in base value for a wrong edge take-off would be excessive."

    A triple flutz is way harder to execute than a triple loop. Essentially that's the equivalent of leaving out a double toe in a combo (not to mention, the different between having level 3's on all your spins instead of level 4's). And I don't think an omitted 2T should be worth the same as an edge change. If it was worth only 4.5 points, A fall on a fully rotated triple flutz with a wrong edge take off would get -3's and then a -1 deduction. So essentially about 1.3 points. A fall on a fully rotated triple loop would garner 2.0 points after GOE/deduction. To mean, that doesn't make sense.

    To put it a different way, it's essentially saying an underrotated triple lutz with a clean edge is worth 4.2, but a fully rotated triple flutz is worth 4.5? The GOE deduction in itself accounts for the wrong edge. I don't think a skater with a clean triple flutz, with everything else okay, should score any less than 5.0 points. A skater with a clean triple lutz edge would score about 7 points, so the 2-point differential to me is enough.

    Mathman, how would you feel about a skater getting a 1.5 reduction in base value, but then the judges must ignore the edge call when coming up with their GOE? i.e. they give GOE as if the jump had a clean edge, but it's up to the tech specialist to apply the 1.5 deduction.

    And it's absolutely not true that you don't score points for intentions in sports. That's why in gymnastics, a high difficulty score can still place a gymnast ahead even with errors. It's the age-old dilemma of going clean with easy difficulty and having errors with harder difficulty.

  6. #36
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,965
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    But the rules for senior competition apply to all entrants in all senior competitions -- those who are already competing "at a high level," those who aspire to get there but haven't achieved that level yet, and those who will never get to elite level but who can qualify as senior level and -- because of age limits -- may not qualify as junior.

    If you want to REQUIRE (not just reward, but penalize and shame anyone who can't achieve) all different triple jumps at the elite level, then you need different rules for elite competition than for other "senior" competitions.
    Nobody is saying it should be required. I'm not sure why you're going on and on about this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    I don't see why a 1.5 reduction in base value for a wrong edge take-off would be excessive. That still gives you more points than a triple Salchow or toe loop. And double that penalty for a flutz that doesn't even try.
    Well, a flutz still needs to be worth more than a double axel. It's harder, so it needs to be scored as such. The same goes for a Lutz with just a minor edge violation...it's a lot harder than toeloop or salchow.

  7. #37
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,965
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    Mathman, how would you feel about a skater getting a reduction in base value, but then the judges must ignore the edge call when coming up with their GOE?
    This is absolutely what should be happening. The same goes for underrotation calls.

    Also, the penalty for underrotations should be on a sliding scale. The more difficult a jump is, the less severe the penalty should be. If you miss 1/4 of a rotation on a Double jump, for example, you've left out a far higher percentage of the rotation for that jump than if you missed a 1/4 rotation on a Quad. The penalty should be start at 60% for easier double jumps and then gradually get more lenient as the jumps become more difficult, with Quads getting 80% base value. An underrotated Quad Toe currently loses 3.1 points. That's pretty ridiculous, especially since the calls between jumps can be so close. It's like losing the points for an entire spin in your program just because your Quad was a couple degrees short. That's not right.

  8. #38
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,747
    Quote Originally Posted by Blades of Passion View Post
    Nobody is saying it should be required. I'm not sure why you're going on and on about this.
    Quote Originally Posted by hurrah View Post
    Another way to go is to require skaters to include at least one attempt of all five triples.
    That's what my first post on the subject responded to.

    Your statement "Asking Ladies to have all of their Triples up through Lutz is like asking Men to have all of their Triples up through Axel...which they ALL do, if they ever want to compete at a high level." did not specify a requirement, I grant you. My mind was already heading in that direction because hurrah had introduced the concept.

    But my question still holds. How do you want to "ask" the ladies to have all the triples, and how do you want to handle skaters who don't but are superior in most other ways?

  9. #39
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    156
    Flutz is not a matter of Difficulty but Conscience.

    Because They ALL know that they will do a Flutz but Lutz.

    Trying? No. It's "Pretending".

    Just pretending Lutz for a some more scores.

    more difficult? worth? such a cheating?

    Flutz and Lip is matter of habit, not execution.

    They even don't try to correct a wrong habits.

  10. #40
    Skating is art, if you let it be. Blades of Passion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,965
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    But my question still holds. How do you want to "ask" the ladies to have all the triples?
    By making 2Axel worth less points and giving a bonus point to competitors that land the full array of jumps in a satisfactory manner.

  11. #41
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,515
    Quote Originally Posted by gmyers View Post
    Sotnikova for one always and never ever does not Flutz \
    She did not get an "e" in her most recent SP.

  12. #42
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,908
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy
    A fall on a fully rotated triple flutz with a wrong edge take off would get -3's and then a -1 deduction. So essentially about 1.3 points.
    That's about 1.3 points too high. You took off wrong, you landed wrong. Everything that had to do with blades on ice you did wrong. Not to mention that when you fell on your butt your blades are not in contact with the ice at all until you scrambled awkwardly to your feet. The only thing you did right was rotate in the air, which is not a skating skill. After all, you could do that on dry land in your stocking feet.

    I kind of agree with PftJump above. Difficulty alone should not be worth any points. Lots of things are difficult. Putting skates on your hands and standing on your head is difficult. (I think Gary Beacon could do it, though ). Whistling Dixie at the same time makes it more difficult still. IMHO the IJS should reward the demonstration of figure skating skills, foremost proper command of edges.

    To me, if the skill you are attempting to exhibit is launching from a back outside edge, and then you don't…

  13. #43
    ~high art~
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    636
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    She did not get an "e" in her most recent SP.
    It was a flutz, not even a slight one at that. The tech panel always makes so many errors it's embarrassing.

  14. #44
    Custom Title hurrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    That's about 1.3 points too high. You took off wrong, you landed wrong. Everything that had to do with blades on ice you did wrong. Not to mention that when you fell on your butt your blades are not in contact with the ice at all until you scrambled awkwardly to your feet. The only thing you did right was rotate in the air, which is not a skating skill. After all, you could do that on dry land in your stocking feet.

    I kind of agree with PftJump above. Difficulty alone should not be worth any points. Lots of things are difficult. Putting skates on your hands and standing on your head is difficult. (I think Gary Beacon could do it, though ). Whistling Dixie at the same time makes it more difficult still. IMHO the IJS should reward the demonstration of figure skating skills, foremost proper command of edges.

    To me, if the skill you are attempting to exhibit is launching from a back outside edge, and then you don't…
    As far as I have learnt from posters here, the difference in take off between a lutz and a flip cannot be reduced to the final moment of the takeoff. For a lutz to be a flutz and not just another flip, the trajectory of the set up has to be like a mirror image of the alphabet S, whereas the trajectory of the flip set up is like the alphabet C.

    To give zero points just because there was one moment in the process of the takeoff that went wrong, is counter to the logic of CoP marking system. If flutz gets zero points, then so should a quad with a fall, because there was one moment in the landing that went wrong, and a spin that travels wildly should get zero points because a spin, by definition, does not travel, etc. If you only give points for what is pristine, then ultimately, you would have no elements to give points to, because no element is actually executed pristinely.

  15. #45
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,908
    Quote Originally Posted by hurrah View Post
    As far as I have learnt from posters here, the difference in take off between a lutz and a flip cannot be reduced to the final moment of the takeoff. For a lutz to be a flutz and not just another flip, the trajectory of the set up has to be like a mirror image of the alphabet S, whereas the trajectory of the flip set up is like the alphabet C.

    To give zero points just because there was one moment in the process of the takeoff that went wrong, is counter to the logic of CoP marking system…
    There were two moments. The take-off and the landing. The skater lost control of his take-off edge and he could not hold the landing (much less land with a smooth, outflowing edge).

    True, he made an S on the ice before the jump attempt.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •